set_rung_comment

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description does not mention side effects, permissions, reversibility, or what happens on success/failure. The destructiveHint annotation indicates destructive behavior, but the description itself lacks transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, very brief sentence. While concise, it lacks structure and does not provide any additional context or breakdown, making it too sparse for a tool with multiple parameters.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the schema's complexity, including expected_revision (implying optimistic concurrency), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the tool's context, such as that it modifies an existing rung or the role of expected_revision.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema lists six parameters (project_id, program_name, section_name, rung_index, comment, expected_revision) but provides no descriptions. The tool description also fails to explain any of them.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (set) and the target (comment attached to one rung), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions for its use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.